Lord_Darkclaw wrote on Feb 10^th, 2007 at 1:07pm:


Dr. Richardson is right, you should really question your reading comprehension ability...

Lord_Darkclaw wrote on Feb 10^th, 2007 at 1:07pm:


Nope, the NAS gives situations based upon assumed levels of accuracy and the base rate of lying and calculates the predictive value of the test which show that even with an accuracy rate of 80%, the test would falsely accuse thousands of people for every spy it caught.

Lord_Darkclaw wrote on Feb 10^th, 2007 at 1:07pm:


Perhaps you missed the part where the NAS said that only area that the polygraph showed accuracy above chance but well below perfection was with specific incidents with subjects untrained in countermeasures.

Lord_Darkclaw wrote on Feb 10^th, 2007 at 1:07pm:


For those trained in countermeasures, the answer is yes.

Dr. Richardson is right, there is no doubt that the polygraph machine accurately measures pulse, blood pressure, respiration, and sweating. And to echo him again, there is serious doubt as to whether changes in these measure correspond to deception. 

An analogy to the polygraph would be ghosthunters that use electromagnetic field detectors who claim that when the EMF meter goes off, it means there's a ghost present. Does anyone question if EMF meter detect electromagnetic fluctuations? No, but to make a claim that the fluctuation corresponds to a ghost and not to some other cause such as electrical wiring, magnetized metal, etc., one should have evidence. 

The CQT polygraph is seriously lacking in its evidence that it can detect deception because there is not a one to one correlation between lying and changes in physiology because these same changes in physiology can occur from other emotional, physical, and mental conditions. The CQT polygraph has no way of winnowing out these other causes and hence is an unreliable and invalid determination of deception.

In addition, countermeasures are a set of methods that allow individuals to exhibit the expected response for non-deception. How hard is it to believe that one can mimic these responses to beat the machine? This isn't the same as drug testing where one is employing a masking agent, one is merely demonstrating the expected physiological changes needed to demonstrate non-deception.

Again, your purported skepticism belies someone who thinks that the CQT polygraph actually works. A true skeptic would look at the evidence and come to the same conclusion as the NAS which is the CQT polygraph in any screening application is danger to society.

Here is another technique that some polygraph examiners are using to deter countermeasure use. The idea is to trick the examinee into thinking that the examiner will "know what it looks like on the charts" if the examinee employs countermeasures.

The polygrapher will ask a question series similar to the following:

1. When I say "now," please curl your toes for the count of three and stop. "Now." 

2. When I say "now," please take three shallow breaths and return to normal. "Now." 

3. When I say "now," please take three breaths slightly deeper than normal and return to normal. "Now."

4. When I say "now," please take several fast shallow breaths as if panting like a dog and return to normal. "Now."

5. When I say "now," please take three breaths each slightly deeper than the last and return to normal. "Now."

6. When I say "now," please push down gently with your left arm for the count of three and stop. "Now."

7. When I say "now," please tighten your sphincter muscle for the count of three and stop. "Now."

Upon completion, the polygrapher will tell the subject, "That worked well! I now know what is normal for you and what it looks like if you do these things intentionally. Obviously we don't want to see any of these things done intentionally as we go through the testing process."

The polygrapher will then proceed with the remainder of the polygraph examination. If you are planning to use countermeasures to reduce the risk of a false positive outcome, don't be fooled by this ruse.

John R. Schwartz, who heads the U.S. Customs and Border Protection polygraph unit, claims in a memo to the American Polygraph Association that "sophisticated countermeasures can be routinely identified":

https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2014/01/25/cbp-polygraph-chief-john-r-schwartz-cl...

However, Schwartz adduces no evidence to support this claim, and did not respond to a request for comment. Any input from knowledgeable sources would be welcome.

Let's use some common sense here regarding polygraph countermeasures.  TLBTLD describes these primary physical countermeasure methods:

1. Tongue Biting - If the polygraph victim...err...candidate doesn't do this discretely, it is possible the polygrapher can see his/her mouth moving.  It is also possible that the camera(s) in the room have high resolution and can zoom in on the candidate's face and detect mouth movements.  Hence, the candidate can be caught easily if they screw up.  Bad idea.

2. Breathing Pattern Changes - There are pneumatic tubes placed around your chest to measure breathing.  These tubes are very sensitive.  If you screw up your breathing manipulation countermeasure just the slightest (like not holding your breath correctly), the tube sensors may detect it.  I mean your breathing is being measured.  I wouldn't chance this.  Bad idea.

3. Mental Thoughts - There is no machine, no doctor, no sensors, no psychic, no magician, nobody that can read your thoughts.  People that claim they can are just entertainers or con artists. Only God knows what you are thinking.  So you can use mental thoughts to excite and calm yourself as needed during the control, relevant, irrelevant questions.  It is easy to pull this off with practice.  BEST IDEA!

And other rumors from movies and such also mention:

4. Putting a Nail/Tack in Shoe - Sometimes you put your feet on a floor pad sensor.  And again, the cameras in the room and the polygrapher may spot  your toes wiggling abnormally.  Plus, do you want to walk around with a tack in your shoe all that time you are in the polygraph building before you take your poly?  Bad idea.

5. Squeezing Your Anus - You sit on a seat sensor.  The polygraph machines knows when you squeeze your butt, wiggle your butt, or pass gas.  Bad idea.

The best countermeasures are mental ones.  I can tell you from experience.  I was able to beat my FBI polygraph with mental countermeasures.  I had also been though the polygraph game before and so I knew how it worked, plus I read TLBTLD, so I was no stranger to this. That along with being on my best behavior, cooperating and playing the stupid game, and making the polygrapher think I was a good guy with nothing to hide.  The impression you give from your behavior is also very important, so that you get on the polygrapher's good side.   I will bet my life and life savings (all two dollars) that nobody can detect mental countermeasures.  If you can read my thoughts, prove it!

To beat your poly, use mental countermeasures only.  Trust me.  This is your safest bet and it works like a charm.

Drew Richardson wrote on Jan 25^th, 2014 at 3:53pm:


Drew,

Thanks for sharing these thoughts. I think the polygraph community could benefit greatly by taking to heart the latter points you raise.

What I find particularly interesting about John Schwartz's claim that sophisticated countermeasures can be routinely detected is the extent to which he is engaging in self-delusion. His claim is, after all, directed not toward lowly job applicants, but to senior members of the polygraph community.

Perhaps Schwartz would be willing to stand up to your polygraph countermeasure challenge (which has now gone some 12 years without a single taker)?

Quote:

George,
Are any data available on the efficacy of these "butt pads?"

George,

I have no doubt that the “butt pad” sensors are sensitive as has been the case with motion detector bars, etc. over the last few decades.  

Sensitivity is not the end-all-be-all though. It is a combination of both sensitivity and specificity which is required (as is the case for real scientific endeavors, e.g., forensic chemistry/toxicology, etc.) to be successful at analytical detection. 

In that, I mean it is a much simpler task to produce a response, and say yes I can see it with this gizmo vs. the task of determining whether there is any response at all in an unknown field that might or might not include (physiologically and/or countermeasure-produced) signal and which does include a lot of noise.  

The results of the first task are what you show the boss to indicate that you are doing something or what you present to he who doles out government research funds to keep the good times rolling.

The degree to which one is successful at the latter task is the measure of whether one is successful in detecting truth and falsehood in real life, and that is what has to be demonstrated, and which to my knowledge has not.

With regard to the countermeasure challenge that you mention in a separate post, the operational parameters are pretty clear and simple as well as the statistics which would be derived from simulated crime ground truth: accuracy in determining truthful and deceptive examinees, both those who have applied countermeasures and those who have not.

The conduct of the countermeasure challenge does not require my participation and could well have been performed many times over the last dozen years by the government proponents of lie detection.  I would not be surprised to find that such is the case.  No public response to the challenge will be forthcoming until those who would accept such challenge have convinced themselves through their own private efforts that they would likely and regularly prevail in taking up the challenge.  Sound of crickets…

common sense,
The masseter muscle can become enlarged if you are a gum chewer or tend to grind your teeth at night. But, I agree with you that this is not the optimum choice for CM's, but should not be discarded outright either.

I think the manufacturer of the fancy headset is just cashing in on polygraph operators' fear of countermeasures. They probably made a bundle off of the silly "butt pad" and see a market in such novelties.